You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq-Jordan
Iraq Might Not Oppose US Attacks On Neighbors
2004-07-07
I was away on the 4th, so I didn't see if this was reported.
CAIRO, July 4 – Iraq might not oppose attacks by US troops based in Iraq on neighboring states if they were backing "terrorists" and "insurgents", Iraq’s interim Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told a leading British newspaper Sunday, July 4. "Foreign support for terrorists is ongoing, very risky and very dangerous. But it will backfire on those governments. A stable and peaceful Iraq is a better neighbor for them," Zebari told the Sunday Telegraph.
A better neighbor, but a bigger threat to their continued rule.
He said the interim government had gathered intelligence detailing the support provided to "insurgent groups" by some neighboring nations. He said "insurgents" had benefited from financial support, logistical assistance and training from neighboring governments. Although he did not name the countries, senior Iraqi officials told the paper that he pointed fingers at Iran and Syria.
Don't forget the Magic Kingdom.
Zebari further said that the provisional government of Iyad Allawi will publish concrete evidence this week on the involvement of foreign governments in assisting "insurgency".
Oh goody, I can't wait.
"Since we started to look at the security situation, we have seen how foreign governments have been helping terrorists," stressed Zebari. He continued: "Why they are doing it we cannot say, but we know where the support is coming from. We have plans to put this before the public within days and it will have substantial impact." Both Syria and Iran have been accused by the United States of supporting anti-occupation operations inside Iraq. US President George W. Bush imposed sanctions on Syria on May 11, accusing Damascus of supporting terrorism and failing to close its borders to "insurgents" looking to fight US forces in Iraq. Some Senators feared the law "could later be used to build a case for a military intervention against Syria".
Would that be the Senators from Massachusetts and North Carolina?
In a separately-related development, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and his visiting Syrian counterpart, Bashar Al-Assad, both called Sunday for the rapid departure of foreign troops from Iraq.
Ok, we'll take the scenic route, east or west, depending on traffic conditions.
"This crisis was predictable, and its source was the aggression and occupation of Iraq by the United States," Khatami told reporters after he greeted Assad, who arrived in Tehran earlier on Sunday for a two-day visit. "There is no ambiguity between us and Syria where Iraq is concerned. The solution is the quick end to the occupation, the installation of a government comprising all elements of the Iraqi people and the cooperation of the international community to bring stability and reconstruction," he said.

For his part, Assad said "Iraq is on the top of our list of preoccupations" although he said the two would countries also discuss "Palestine and the halt in the peace process". "Regarding Iraq, we have always been in agreement with Iran on the need for Iraq's territorial integrity, a representative government and the departure of the occupying forces," he added. The Syrian President paid a short visit to Tehran in February 2003 to get his orders on the eve of the US-led war against Iraq, after an earlier trip in January 2001. Khatami last visited Syria during a May 2003 tour of Arab states. Coming at a critical stage for both countries, Assad’s visit is primarily meant to cement bilateral relations to stand up to the daunting challenges ahead facing Damascus and Tehran.
They got that last part right.
Posted by:Steve

#10  'Hawk, you da man! There's a job waiting for you at the reference desk of the Rantburg Public Library & Pistol Range if you're looking for some extra income.
Posted by: Mike   2004-07-07 3:00:15 PM  

#9   "There is no ambiguity between us and Syria where Iraq is concerned.

Yes, it's quite obvious those two countries regard Iraq as low hanging fruit that is ripe for the picking.

The solution is the quick end to the occupation, the installation of a government comprising all elements of the Iraqi people and the cooperation of the international community to bring stability and reconstruction," he said.

The installation part is going about as well as can be expected. This latest development is one of the few really bright spots in some time as it represents a significant new alignment of Iraqi and American regional goals.

As to a "quick end to the occupation ..." Well, that's going to take a little more time. You see, Iran and Syria have been occupied by dictatorships for some time and toppling such entrenched tyrants takes a while ...
Posted by: Zenster   2004-07-07 1:16:51 PM  

#8  Use trebuchets to launch pig carcasses in embassy grounds then declare it an infidel holy site.
Posted by: ed   2004-07-07 11:35:09 AM  

#7  Mike at least one was Leiberman. Who was pretty obviously pro. Usually absent Senators pair off - the fors and against who cant make it agree to cancel each other out. On something as lopsided as this, there probably werent any antis to pair off with.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-07-07 11:29:15 AM  

#6  Mike - probably Kerry missed the vote, like 90% of the others
Posted by: Frank G   2004-07-07 11:18:45 AM  

#5  Some Senators feared the law "could later be used to build a case for a military intervention against Syria".

So what's wrong with that? Unless, of course, they don't have a problem with just letting fly missiles and bombs on Damascus at some point in time without having to "build a case", which is just fine with me.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2004-07-07 11:17:33 AM  

#4  'Hawk, thanks for the research. Unless Sr. Marcia lied to me in high school math, 89 + 4 = 93. Do you know who the seven abstentions were?
Posted by: Mike   2004-07-07 11:13:40 AM  

#3  More good news for the US and it puts a huge hole into the theory that the Iraqis hate us, hate our culture, and hate our political system. They are standing up against their dictatorship neighbors and showing mucho cajones by siding with the "Great Satan".

If I were to play devil's advocate, the only objection to this would be to claim that Iraq is showing a warlike mentality and this constitutes a threat to their neighbors. I think that's nonsense, but that's the way the LLLs and the Arab Street will spin it.
Posted by: Chris W.   2004-07-07 11:11:30 AM  

#2  A sovereign Iraq is is a beautiful place. I'd like to order a cart of folding chairs for the upcoming cage match.
Posted by: Super Hose   2004-07-07 11:08:37 AM  

#1   Some Senators feared the law "could later be used to build a case for a military intervention against Syria".
Would that be the Senators from Massachusetts and North Carolina?


No, as they both voted for the Syria Accountability Act. The vote was 89-4, and the four nos were Jeffords, Enzi,Chafee, and Byrd. One Republican, one "RINO", one ex-Rep turned Dem-leaning Independent, and the Grand Kleagle himself. No mainstream Dems. The bill was cosponsored by Sen. Boxer of Calif.
Posted by: Liberalhawk   2004-07-07 10:59:53 AM  

00:00